1.

INTRODUCTION

Dairy enterprise plays a very important role in the rural economy of India. The returns
from small holdings can be maximized by proper combination of dairy enterprise with
crop production. Commercialized Dairy farming for producing more milk round the year
of high quality is the only solution for the viability of Dairy Industry in the present
National and International Dairy Scenario. Modern dairying is geared to maximum
production as opposed to traditional dairying.
India ranks first in number of animals and in production of milk in the world. In 2003-04,
the production of milk in the country is 88.1 million tones. India accounts for 15% of
world’s milk production and its production is growing at the rate of 1.1% per year. In this
production, the contribution of crossbred cows is significant. As per the last 17th livestock
census, crossbred cattle constitute 13.3% of the total cattle and 86.7% are indigenous
cattle. Out of total livestock in the country, 38.2% are cattle and 20.2% are buffaloes.
There is a tremendous increase in the crossbred cattle in the country i.e. 22.8% but the
indigenous cattle declined by 10.2%during the inter-censual period from 1997 to
2003.The total cattle population has decreased by 6.9% and the buffalo population has
increased by 8.9% during the period.

Dairy farming forms an essential part of Gujarat's rural economy.

Gujarat has been known as the 'milk pail' of India. Dairying gives
regular and steady income to farmers next to agriculture and it is the
best vocation to achieve higher growth of rural economy. Most of the
rural people especially women; eke out their livelihood by rearing milch
animals and supplying milk to the Milk Cooperatives. In 2003-04, the
milk production in the state is 6421 thousand tonnes. As per the last
17th livestock census, conducted in 2003, the state had 4.01% of cattle
and 7.29% of buffaloes of the country. In Gujarat, the crossbred cattle
have increased heavily by 86.8% and indigenous cattle have also
increased by 5.9% during the period between 16th and 17th census.

1 College of Agribusiness
Management
There is an increase of 10% in cattle population and buffalo population
has increased by 13.6% during the inter-censul period.

Indian livestock feed industry, though quite old, is still in a very

primitive stage, as it is supplying only about 5% for cattle feed. India
has an organized feed compounding industry. In the past 30 years, the
annual production of compounded feed has gone up to over 3 million
tonnes from 40,000 tonnes, the bulk being accounted for by the
western and southern parts of India. However, average milk yield at
300 kg per lactation is abysmally low due to severe genetic erosion and
fodder scarcity. In India, livestock is an integral part of crop farming,
and resource use in mixed farming (crop + livestock) is often highly
self-reliant, as nutrients and energy flow from crops to livestock and
back. There are two major factors, which determine the demand for
compound feed in India. Firstly size of livestock population and
secondly feed consumption per animal.

Feeds that are formulated largely utilize agro-industrial by-products and other non-
conventional materials. However, this production meets only a small percentage of the
total feed concentrate requirements, even for the organized dairy farming sector in the
country. This gap is likely to widen by 2010 when the requirement of cattle feed
concentrates would be around 5.4 million tonnes. Godrej Agrovet Ltd., a leading player in
the animal feeds, manufactures a range of animal feed products for cows, buffaloes,
poultry, fish and shrimps.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

GAVL is producing advanced compound feed, which is fortified with essential nutrients;
higher Bypass protein percentage (i.e.18-22%), along with higher Bypass fat percentage
(i.e. 2-2.5%). It contributes to the milk and fat yielding capacity of the animal. Bypass
Protein Feed is a new generation cattle feed in India and is manufactured by a special
formulation. Bypass Protein Feed (BPF) contains a large percentage of solvent extracted

2 College of Agribusiness
Management
protein meals, grain by-products, whole grains, molasses, minerals and vitamins. The
special feature of the formulation is that 65 per cent of the total protein in the feed is
rumen non-degradable protein.

Cattle Feed: BYPRO, a feed for high yielding milch cattle and buffaloes.
Buffalo Feed: MILK MORE special feed for Buffalo for high milk and butter fat content.

GAVL feels that there is tremendous potential in tapping the cattle feed marketing in
Anand district. Marketing is a continuous process to address to the changing customer
needs and maintain consistency in the supply chain. Each product demands continuous
monitoring of consumer behavior to add value for effective marketing. With this
background this study was conducted on consumer behavior for cattle feed in Anand
district with the following objectives:

• To determine the target buyers of cattle feed of Godrej Agrovet in Anand district on
demographic and behavioral basis.
• To determine the role of women in decision making for cattle feed buying.
• To examine the value propositions for cattle feed buying and Study the factors affecting
decision making for these products.
• To study the extension activities undertaken by Godrej Agrovet limited and find out the
most suitable communication channel.
• To identify the gaps between potential and actual market share for these products and
devise strategies for reducing these gaps.

3 College of Agribusiness
Management
 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

INFORMATION REQUIRED

 Data related to market size of cattle feed in Anand district.

 Data related to penetration level of Raw material, compound feed and advanced
compound feed.
 Data related to the feeding practices of farmers.
 Detailed facts on perception of buyer.
 Data related to role of women in decision making.
 Detailed facts related to extension activities undertaken by the company.
 Data related to acceptance and awareness of Godrej cattle feed among the
consumers.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
Information was collected with the help of structured questionnaire having both open and
closed-ended questions by interacting with farmers, dealers, distributors and company
officials etc.

SAMPLING METHOD
Judgmental sampling method was adopted to carry out the study.

DATA SOURCE
Data were collected from both the sources primary as well as secondary.
Primary Source: Farmers, dealers, distributors and company officials etc.
4 College of Agribusiness
Management
Secondary Source: Co-operatives, Dairies, NDDB, GCMMF, Web sites, Magazines,
Publications.

AREA OF STUDY
Anand district of Gujarat. (Taluka-Khambhat,Petlad,Nadiad).

Sample size

 Farmers=134

5 College of Agribusiness
Management
  Dealers=12

 Distributors=3

 Animals surveyed

o Cows=633

o Buffaloes=624

Breed of surveyed cows

 Jersey = 455
 HF = 127
 Indigenous = 31

Number of milking cows surveyed = 457

Number of non-milking cows surveyed 176

Number of milking buffaloes surveyed = 141

Number of non-milking buffaloes surveyed = 110

Data Analysis
Simple arithmetic tools like average and percentage have been used along with graphical
presentations for fulfilling the objectives of the project.

Limitations
 Small sample size of the farmers, dealers and distributors taken may not represent
the entire opinion.
 Some farmers were giving misleading information about their milk production and
feeding practices.
 Due to the paucity of time most of the samples taken from various areas could not
be crosschecked.

6 College of Agribusiness
Management
 3. Results and discussion

Market of Cattle feed in Anand

The market size of cattle feed in Anand district (Taluka: Khambhat, Nadiad, Petlad) of
Gujarat is approximately 5250 tonnes/month. This market potential is estimated on the
assumption that each dairy farmer is feeding his cattle on the basis of recommended
feeding practices i.e.1/2 kg of feed should be provided per liter of milk production. The
graph shown below depicts that the potential for cattle feed is highest in Undel i.e 1740
tonnes. The major reason for this is that the milk production of Undel is highest i.e.
348000 liters/month among all the surveyed villages. Other high potential villages are
Vadola i.e. 474 tonnes, Bamanva i.e.420 tonnes, Vasana i.e. 360 tonnes and Vaso i.e. 300
tonnes per month.

7 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Exhibit 3.1Market size of cattle feed in Anand district

4000
3480
3500

3000

2500
Milk procurement
tonnes/month

2000 1740
Feed consumption
1500
948
1000 840
648 720
600 540
474 420 360 447 387
500 324 360 330 300 300 300 360 270
180 165 223.5 193.5240
120 150 150 180

0
Bamanva

Deva
Noortalavadi
Finav
Popatpura

Rampur
Vadola

Vasana

Sokhada

Nagara

Vaso

Nadiad surrounding
Undel

Pij
Shekhdi

Categorization of market for Compound feed and Advanced compound

feed
The survey reveals that the cattle feed in Anand district is composed of mainly three types
of feed. These are Raw material, Compound feed and Advanced compound feed.
Raw material: is the material, which is unprocessed and home mix material.
Compound feed: is processed material with some percentage of Vitamins and Minerals.
Advanced compound feed: is especially designed feed for the high yielding animals.
Mixing vitamins and minerals in it makes it up. Apart from it is having Bypass fat and
Bypass protein percentage for better yield and fat % in the milk.
Exhibit 3.2 depicts that in surveyed area the percentage of compound feed used in cattle
feed is highest i.e.59%. This is because AMUL is providing co-operative feed to the dairy
farmers; this co-operative feed is falls under the category of compound feed. The chart

8 College of Agribusiness
Management
shows that raw material use is 37% and use of advanced compound feed is only 4% of
total cattle feed.
Exhibit 3.2 Categorization of cattle feed market

4%
37%
RM
CF
ACF
59%

RM: Raw material CF: Compound feed ACF: Advanced compound feed

Estimation of current market size for RM, CF and ACF:

According to exhibit 3.2 the existing cattle feed market is having three categories i.e. RM,
CF and ACF and their share is 37%, 59% and 4% respectively; so the available market i.e
5250 tonnes of cattle feed has demand for 1942.5 tonnes RM, 3097.50 tonnes CF and 210
tonnes ACF. The table 3.1 depicts the amount of RM, CF and ACF in the current feeding
practices in each surveyed village.

Table 3.1 Share of RM, CF and ACF

Village RM tones/month CF tones/month ACF tones/month

Undel 678.6 1026.6 75
Vadola 175.38 279.66 25

9 College of Agribusiness
Management
Popatpura 119.88 191.16 12.96
Bamanva 155.4 247.8 16.8
Finav 66.6 106.2 7.2
Vasana 133.2 212.4 14.4
Sokhada 48.84 77.88 5.28
Nagara 28.8 141.6 9
Shekhdi 77.7 123.9 8
Noortalavadi 69.6 70.8 4.8
Pij 55.5 88.5 6
Vaso 111 177 12
Rampur 55.5 88.5 6
Deva 66.6 106.2 7.2
Nadiad surrounding 99.9 159.3 10.8
Total 1942.5 3097.5 209.64

Current Status of GAVL brands in Anand

The current status of GAVL in the surveyed talukas is 1100 kg in terms of sales. Exhibit
3.3 depicts that in the surveyed talukas GAVL is having highest sale in Khambhat taluka
i.e. 600 kg followed by Nadiad taluka i.e. 500 kg. The important feature of this graph is
that there is zero sales in Petlad taluka currently. This is due to less number of field staff
to take care of customers.

Exhibit 3.3 Current status of GAVL brands in surveyed area

10 College of Agribusiness
Management
 7

6
Sales (in tonnes)

0
Khambhat Nadiad Petlad
Taluka

Share of different GAVL brands in current sales

GAVL is having three brands in cattle feed i.e. Milkmore, Bypro and HP pellet. Among
these Milmore and Bypro are the premium brands of GAVL.
Milkmore: a special feed for Buffalo for high milk and butter fat content.
Bypro: a feed for high yielding milch cattle and buffaloes.
HP Pallet: a regular feed for cattle.
Exhibit 3.4 depicts that the share of Milkmore is highest among all the brands i.e. 62%
followed by Bypro 24% in rest of 14% share lies with HP pellet in the surveyed area.

Exhibit 3.4 Share of GAVL brands in current sales

11 College of Agribusiness
Management
 H P P a lle t B yp ro
14% 24%

MM
62%

Penetrated market of GAVL

The market, which is penetrated by GAVL brands, is distributed to surveyed area as

shown in exhibit 3.5. This is shown that highest sales of GAVL brands is in Undel village
i.e.23% followed by Vadola i.e.14%, Vasana, Nadiad surrounding and Pij i.e. 11% each.
Sokhada and Deva accounts for 9%each. Nagara and Bamanva are having 6% each of the
total current sales of GAVL brands in the surveyed area.
Exhibit 3.5 Penetration of GAVL brands

Undel
11% Vadola
23%
9% Bamanva
Vasana
Sokhada
11% Nagara
14%
6% Pij
9% 6% Deva
11%
Nadiad surrounding

Users of MilkMore

12 College of Agribusiness
Management
Milkmore captures its reported that in surveyed area highest market among all the GAVL
brands. Among the surveyed 134 farmers, the farmers who are using MM are 23%
followed by Bypro i.e. 2% and HP pellet i.e. 1%. Exhibit 3.6 depicts that the highest
percentage of Milkmore customers is in Sokhada i.e. 20% followed by Vadola i.e. 16%
and Undel i.e. 13%. In Bamanva, Vasana and Nagara customers are 10% in each.
Exhibit 3.6 Distribution of Milkmore users

Farmers using milkmore

Ns U
D 6% 13%
P 6%
N3%
She
3% V
3% 16%
N
10%
B
10%
Sok V
20% 10%

Feed composition in Anand

Exhibit 3.7 depicts the feed composition in the surveyed area. It shows that highest share
goes to AMUL daan i.e. 45% followed by Maize cake 11%, Rice bran 10%, CSC 8%,
Maize Gluten 6%, Radhakishan daan 5%, MM 4%, Tur cuni and Broken rice 3% each,

13 College of Agribusiness
Management
cotton seed, Madhuram, Dhara daan and others 1% each. This shows that market of cattle
feed is highly fragmented as so many components with small market share except market
leader i.e. AMUL daan are there in the surveyed area.

Exhibit 3.7 Composition of cattle feed in Anand

AMUL
Maize cake
CSC
Maize bran

1%3% 5% Maize glutin

1%
1%
4%
1% Rice bran
3%
45% Tur chuni
10%
Cotton seed
MM
1% Broken rice
6% Madhuram
8%
11%
Dhara dan
Radhakishan
Others

Current feeding practices

Cattle feeding practices are very traditional. Farmers choose their own ingredients and
prepare their own formulations believing that by these means they are able to pay more
individual attention to their cattle. The bulk of the feed is being produced by un-organized
sector compressed of home and custom mixers.
Table 3.2 depicts the feeding pattern of all the surveyed villages. It shows that feeding
practices are not exactly same in each village but AMUL daan, Maize cake; CSC, Maize

14 College of Agribusiness
Management
bran and Rice bran are common components of cattle feed in each surveyed village.
While feeding of Tur chuni, Broken rice and Daan of local companies vary in surveyed
area.

Table 3.2 Current feeding practices in surveyed villages

Unit kg/feeding
Village AMUL Maize cake CSC Maize bran Maize gluten Rice bran Tur chuni
Undel 26 3.72 3 0.5 4 2.75 0.5
Vadola 31.5 5.5 1 8.75 0 2.75 0
Popatpura 27 2 0.75 1.5 0 1.25 0
Bamanva 17.5 1.75 0 0.5 0 6 0
Finav 20.5 2 1 0.5 0 6.5 0
Vasana 17.5 10.25 0 0 0 10.75 0
Sokhada 22 4.25 2.75 0.5 0 4.5 0
Nagara 15 2.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 5.5 0
Shekhdi 29.5 11 5.75 15 0 3.5 0
Noortalavadi 6 10.2 1 5.2 0 2.5 0
Pij 6.5 4.5 4.5 1.5 0 0 0
Vaso 15.5 0.5 3 2.5 2.5 1 2.5
Rampur 20 3.5 1 1 0 2.75 0.5
Deva 19 7.5 11.5 0.5 0.2 10 0
Nadiad surrounding 3 2 15.5 2 0 4 18
276.5 71.17 51.25 40.45 7.2 63.75 21.5

Broken
Village Cotton seed MilkMore rice Madhuram Dhara dan Radhakishan Others
Undel 0 2.2 0 0 0 0 0
Vadola 0 5 0 0 0 0 0
Popatpura 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Bamanva 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0
Finav 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.75
Vasana 0 3.5 0 0 0 0 0
Sokhada 0 6.5 0 0 0 0 0
Nagara 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

15 College of Agribusiness
Management
Shekhdi 1 1 0 3.5 4 0 4
Noortalavadi 3 1 0 4 1 12 3
Pij 0 1 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5
Vaso 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.5
Rampur 0 0 1 0 0 3 2.2
Deva 1 2 1 0 0 3 2
Nadiad surrounding 0 4.5 4 0 0 0 8
5 28.2 6.5 7.5 5 18.5 28.95

Determination of Target buyers of cattle feed in Anand

On demographic basis
Gender distribution
Exhibit 3.8 depicts the gender distribution of respondents of the current study. Total male
respondents are 72% and female respondents are 28% of total 134 respondents. The ratio
of male:female is 2.5:1. The highest male respondents reported from Vadola and
Noortalavadi i.e. 9 followed by Bamanva ,Sokhada and Nadiad surrounding area i.e. 8.
The important feature of this graph is that in Bamanva, Pij, Vaso and Nadiad surrounding
area only male respondents are reported. The highest female respondents reported from
Shekhdi i.e.7 followed by Undel i.e.6 and Vasana i.e. 5. This determines the participation
of male and female members in dairy farming in the surveyed villages.

Exhibit 3.8 Gender distribution of respondents

16 College of Agribusiness
Management
 120

100

80

60
M a le
Percentage

40 F e m a le

20

0
Pij

Deva
Undel

Finav

Vaso
Nagara

Rampur
Vadola

Shekhdi
Vasana
Sokhada
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Nadiad surrounding

Age distribution
Exhibit 3.9 depicts that respondent of the current study falls under different classes of age
distribution. It shows that the highest percentage of respondents i.e. 48% fall under the
30-40 years class; followed by 22% in 20-30 years class, 16% in 40-50 years class and
14% in 50-60 years class. This shows that not only mature generation but also the new
generation is having participation in dairy management.

Exhibit 3.9 Age distribution of respondents

17 College of Agribusiness
Management
 120

100

80
50-60
40-50
60
30-40
Percentage

20-30
40

20

0
Pij

Deva
Undel

Finav

Vaso
Nagara

Rampur
Shekhdi
Vadola

Vasana
Sokhada
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Nadiad surrounding

Education level
Exhibit 3.10 depicts the education level of the respondents. This shows that highest
number of respondents is uneducated i.e. 33% followed by the persons educated up to
10thstandard i.e. 18% and persons educated up to 5th standard i.e. 17%. Education of
decision maker decides the level of active participation of the respondents in modernizing
the dairy farming.

Exhibit 3.10 Education level of respondents

18 College of Agribusiness
Management
 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Pij

Deva
Finav
Undel

Vaso
Nagara
Vadola

Vasana

Rampur
Sokhada

Shekhdi
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Nadiad surrounding
U n e d u c a te d u p to 5 u p to 8 u p to 1 0 u p to 1 2 >12

Social class
In the surveyed area respondents are categorized in to 4 social classes. Upper class, Upper
middle class, Lower middle class and Lower class on the basis of social status earned by
the person not only in terms of high income or wealth earned but also by their say in the
local community. So, that this categorization is helpful in identifying Opinion leader. An
opinion leader is the person who can influence the purchase decision of the other persons
by having a good reputation in the society. Exhibit 3.11 depicts that Lower middle class
(41), Upper class (34) and Lower class (6), highest follows the percentage of Upper
middle class i.e. 53. The target customers of Upper middle class will be more beneficial
for the company as they have high disposable income as well as good reputation in the
local community.

Exhibit 3.11 Social classification of respondents

19 College of Agribusiness
Management
 100%

80%

D
60%
C
B
40%
A

20%

0%

Pij

Deva
Rampur
Undel

Shekhdi
Nagara
Finav
Bamanva

Sokhada
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Vaso
Vadola

Vasana

Nadiad surrounding
Income from dairy business
The study reveals that dairy farming is the primary as well as secondary business for the
farmers. This can be decided on the basis of income they are earning from dairy business.
Exhibit 3.12 depicts that there is large variation in income earned by dairy farming. It is
reported that among 134 respondents 27% farmers fall in category of Rs.10000-20000 per
month income earned from dairy business is highest. This is followed by 25% farmers
who fall under the category of those earning Rs.20000-30000 per month while 23%
farmers fall under the category of those earning less than Rs.5000 per month. But the
unique feature is that there are 2% farmers who fall under the category of farmers earning
more than Rs.100000 per month from the dairy business.

Exhibit 3.12 Income earned from dairy business

20 College of Agribusiness
Management
 120 >100
90 -10 0
100
80 -90

80 70 -80
60 -70
60
50 -60
Percentage

40 40 -50
30 -40
20
20 -30
0 10 20
Pij

Deva
Undel

Finav

Vaso
5 10
Nagara

Rampur
Shekhdi
Vadola

Vasana
Sokhada
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

<5
Nadiad surrounding

Behavioral basis:
Attitude of farmers
Exhibit 3.13 depicts the number of customers buying products from a fixed shop or
according to their convenience. It’s shown that in all the surveyed villages; number of
customers buying products from a fixed shop is higher i.e.115 (86%) in comparison to
customers buying products according to convenience i.e.17 (14%). The number of
customers buying products according to convenience is highest in Vasana i.e. 38%
followed by Finav i.e. 30% of surveyed customers in these villages.

Exhibit 3.13 Attitude of farmers for buying

21 College of Agribusiness
Management
 120

100

80

60
F ix e d s h o p
Percentage

A c c o r d in g to c o n v e n ie n c e
40

20

0
Pij

Deva
Undel

Finav

Vaso
Nagara

Rampur
Shekhdi
Vadola

Vasana
Sokhada
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Nadiad surrounding

Reasons for buying from a fixed shop

There are several reasons that are affecting buying decision but the reasons for buying
from fixed shop can be categorized in certain categories. Exhibit 3.14 depicts that farmers
are buying cattle feed from a fixed shop as the highest percentage goes to credit
availability i.e. 39% followed by relationship with the dealer i.e. 21%, easy to reach i.e.
16%, quality 14% and any other reason accounts for 10%.
Exhibit3.14 Reasons for buying from a fixed shop

10% Credit availability

16% 39% Relationship

Quality

Easy to reach
14%
Other
21%

Wheigtage of reasons for fixed shop buying in surveyed villages

22 College of Agribusiness
Management
The above-mentioned reasons have different weightage for different customers and vary
in surveyed villages as shown in exhibit 3.15.It shows that credit availability has highest
weightage in Skhada i.e. 45% followed by Bamanva i.e. 42%.

Exhibit 3.15 Weightage of reasons in surveyed villages

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%
Noortalavadi

surrounding
Popatpura

Bam anva

Sokhada

Shekhdi
Vadola

Vasana

Nagara
Undel

Finav

Deva
Ram pur
Vaso
Pij

Nadiad
Credit availability Relationship Quality Easy to reach Other

Mode of buying
The study shows that market of cattle feed is credit-based market. The major reason is co-
operatives are providing cattle feed to the farmers and procure milk from them. These
dairies deduct the payment of cattle feed at the time of final payment to the milk
producers so there is no need to pay it in cash by farmers. Exhibit 3.16 depicts that the
number of farmers buying cattle feed on credit is higher i.e. 90 as compared to cash i.e.44.
This is highest in Shekhdi i.e. 12 followed by Noortalavadi and Undel i.e. 9 in each and
Vadola i.e. 8. The number of farmers buying on cash basis is highest in Vasana i.e. 5
followed by Rampur, Deva and Nadiad surounding area i.e. 4.

Exhibit 3.16 Mode of buying

23 College of Agribusiness
Management
 14
12
10
Number

8
6
4
2
0
Undel

Noortalavadi
Popatpura

Nagara
Sokhada

Vaso

Rampur
Pij

surrounding
Vadola

Shekhdi
Bamanva

Finav

Deva
Vasana

Nadiad
Cash Credit

User status
User status shows the different categories of the customers. The ex-users are the persons
who have used the product but due to some reasons they have stopped its use so after
finding solution for their problem these can also be converted to the regular customers.
First time users are also very important because if they find product good once, they will
convert as the regular customers of the product. Though any category can be of potential
users but the customers who have shown their keen interest falls under the category of
potential users. Exhibit 3.17 depicts ex-user i.e.25, regular user i.e.19; first time user
i.e.13 and then potential user i.e.11 highest follow the number of non-user i.e.53 in the
surveyed area.

Exhibit 3.17 User status in surveyed villages

24 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Nadiad surrounding
Deva
Rampur
Vaso
Pij
Noortalavadi
Shekhdi
Nagara
Sokhada
Vasana
Finav
Bamanva
Popatpura
Vadola
Undel

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Number

Nonuser Ex-user Potential user First time user Regular user

Readiness stage
The readiness stage shows the awareness and acceptance level of GAVL products among
the surveyed farmers. Its shown that 91% of the respondents are aware about the GAVL
brands and 27% of respondents are accepting GAVL brands as user. Exhibit 3.18 depicts
that the awareness about the Godrej cattle feed is present in all the surveyed villages.
Awareness level is highest in Undel i.e. 13 followed by Vadola i.e 12, Vasana i.e.11,
Noortalavadi, Sokhada and Deva i.e10 in each. The acceptance level shows the number of
the current users of GAVL cattle feed. Graph shows that number of current users is
highest in Vasana i.e.9 followed by Undel i.e.8, Vadola and Sokhada i.e. 6 in each,
Bamanva and Nagara i.e.4 in each. Presently, there is no user in Finav, Shekhdi and
Noortalvadi.

Exhibit 3.18 Awareness and acceptance level of GAVL brands

25 College of Agribusiness
Management
 14

12

10

8
Number

Aw areness
6
Acceptance
4

Pij
Undel

Deva
Rampur
Nagara

Shekhdi
Sokhada
Finav
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Vaso
Vadola

Vasana

Nadiad surrounding
Value propositions
The value proposition consists of the whole cluster of benefits the company promises to
deliver, its more than the core positioning of the offering. Basically, the value proposition
is a statement about the resulting experience customers can expect. The expectations of
the customers are shown in percentage in exhibit 3.19. Customers perceived GAVL feed
as standard brand i.e.35%, increase milk production i.e. 25% quality product i.e.20%,
increase fat %i.e. 10%, maintain animal health and increases profit i.e.5 % each.

Exhibit 3.19 Value propositions for GAVL brands

26 College of Agribusiness
Management
 20%
Quality
35%
Increased yield
Increased fat%
Animal health
Increased profit
25%
5% Brand image
5% 10%

Reasons for feeding Raw material

The major reasons of feeding raw material to the animals are stated in exhibit 3.20. This
shows the perception of the farmer about raw material feeding as 25% farmer says that
they feed RM to their animal due to taste preference of their animal, 23% to maintain
health of the animal, 20% to maintain the milk yield and 19% to maintain the fat% in the
milk production. Some minor reasons like it provides ease in AI (1%), cheaper source of
good nutrient (7%), supplement (3%), and increase bulkiness (2%) is also reported in the
surveyed area.

Exhibit 3.20 Reasons for feeding Raw material

27 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Cheaper

Supplement

Maintenance of milk yield

1% 7% 2% 3%
20%
Maintenance of fat%
25%

Maintenance of animal
health
19%
23% Due to tase prefernece of
animal
Ease in AI

Bukiness in feed

Awareness of CF/ACF
Awareness level of farmers for CF/ACF is stated in exhibit 3.21. It shows that 10 % of
farmers are aware of CF/ACF while 90% are unaware. This is reported that major source
of information for CF is co-operative dairy while they have no information abut ACF.

Exhibit 3.21 Awareness about CF/ACF among surveyed farmers

10%

Aware
Unaware

90%

28 College of Agribusiness
Management
Readiness to switch to CF/ACF
The response of farmers to switch to CF/ACF is stated in exhibit 3.22. Its reported that
30% of farmers say that they will switch over to CF/ACF. This 70% negative response is
there due to farmers’ faith in co-operative feed and 90%of the farmers are unaware of the
fact, this co-operative feed is CF so they believe that whatever they are feeding is the best
for their animal health and any CF or any foreign feed can affect their profits adversely.

Exhibit 3.22Readiness to switch to CF/ACF

30%

Yes
No

70%

Reasons to switch over to CF/ACF

The current study reveals among surveyed farmers 30% farmers who are ready to switch
over to CF/ACF have some reasons to switch to CF/ACF as 35%of them are ready if they
will get higher profit, 25%are ready to crosscheck the proposition offered by GAVL,
22%are ready to take trials and rest 15 %to improve health of their animal as shown in
exhibit 3.23.

29 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Exhibit 3.23 Reasons to switch to CF/ACF

15%
22%

Trial
Crosscheck
Increased Prof it

35% Improved animal health

28%

Buying role of women for cattle feed

The role of women in decision-making can be distinguished in four categories:
Initiator: who suggest the idea of buying the product.
Influencer: whose view or advice influences the decision
Decider: who decides on any component of a buying decision: whether to buy, what to
buy, how to buy, how much to buy, or where to buy etc.
Buyer: who makes the actual purchase
In the current study role of initiator and influencer clubbed together. Exhibit 3.24depicts
that woman as an initiator and influencer is having great significance in the surveyed area
and dairying at the household level is largely the domain of women. Women are
independently taking decision in Shekhdi and Noortalavadi i.e. 100% as shown in below
graph and in these villages women can control the products and income from dairying. In
Vasana and Bamanva their decision making power ranges from 85-90% followed by
Sokhada 80% and Finav i.e. 70%. The influencing power of women is highest in
Noortalavadi i.e.100% followed by Finav i.e. 80%, Shekhdi i.e. 78%, Vasana i.e. 75%
30 College of Agribusiness
Management
and Undel, Vadola i.e.60% each. The unique feature of this analysis is that in Finav,
Undel, Vadola, Popatpura, Nagara, Rampur and Deva their influencing power is more
than their decision making. While in Vaso, and Nadiad surrounding area neither they can
influence or take the decision for cattle feed buying. Its also reported that in Vasana and
Undel 10% of women are buyer.

Exhibit 3.24 Role of women in buying decisions

120

100

80
Percentage

60 Initiator+influencer
Decider
40

20

Nadiad surrounding
Noortalavadi
Popatpura

Bamanva

Sokhada

Rampur
Shekhdi
Nagara
Undel

Deva
Finav

Vasana

Pij
Vadola

Vaso

Factors influencing decision-making

There are several factors, which can affect the buying decision of buyer. The current
study has undertaken some factors and exhibit 3.25 depicts that these were Price of the
product (6), taste consideration of animal (13), Increase milk yield (47), Increase fat
%(37), Nutrient requirement (38), Dealers’ recommendation (10), Availability of product
(12), Influence of opinion leader (10), Past experience of the farmer (83), Increased profit
(60), Rapport of sales representative (2), Quality (40), Animal health (15) or any other
factor (13). The highest number of responses goes to the past experience of the farmer
followed by increased profit, Increased milk yield and Quality of the product.

31 College of Agribusiness
Management
Special feature: In Rampur village its reported that if farmers are using feed of any
private company the co-operative dairies denied to buy their milk as well as to give AI to
their animals so it also affect their decision making activity.

Exhibit 3.25 Factors influencing decision-making

45
40 Other
35
Number of response

AH
30 Quality
25 RSR

20 IP
PE
15
IOL
10
AoP
5
DR
0 NR
Finav

Vaso
Bamanva

Deva
Vadola

Pij
Vasana

Noortalavadi
Sokhada

Shekhdi
Popatpura

Rampur
Undel

Nagara

Nadiad surrounding
IFP
IMY
Price
Taste

Extension activities undertaken by GAVL

GAVL is undertaking extension activities to disseminate the knowledge of dairy
management among the farmers and to assure them about the success of GAVL brands.
Presently, there are mainly two activities undertaken by GAVL i.e. Farmers’ meeting and
field trials.
Farmer meetings
The company takes Farmer meeting as primary extension activity. A team of Veterinary
officer, Territory manager and a field officer is organizing it on the basis of need of the
customers and potential of the area. Presently the number of farmers’ meeting held in the
surveyed area is 10.Exhibit 3.26 shows that the highest number of meetings held is in
32 College of Agribusiness
Management
Nagara i.e. 3 followed by Undel and Vadola i.e. 2 in each. Sometimes, these meetings are
especially organized for the women to discuss problems with the company’s lady
veterinarian without any hesitation. As, it is reported that most of the problems in dairy
farming is related to the reproduction.

Exhibit 3.26 Farmer Meetings in surveyed villages

3
Num ber

Nadiad surrounding
Noortalavadi
Popatpura

Bamanva

Sokhada

Shekhdi
Vasana

Nagara
Vadola

Rampur
Undel

Vaso

Deva
Finav

Pij

Farmers attended Godrej meetings

Exhibit 3.27 depicts the number of the farmers attended meeting of GAVL. The total
number of farmers who have attended meeting is 30 out of 134 surveyed farmers. Its
shown that in Vasana highest number of persons attended the meeting i.e. 8 followed by
Sokhada and Undel i.e.6 in each. In Nagara highest number of meetings held but the
persons who have attended these meetings are 4 in number as respondents of the current
study.

Exhibit 3.27 Farmers attended Godrej meetings in surveyed area

33 College of Agribusiness
Management
 16

14

12

10
Num ber

Yes
8
No
6

Nadiad surrounding
Noortalavadi
Popatpura

Bamanva

Sokhada

Shekhdi
Vasana

Nagara
Vadola

Rampur
Undel

Vaso

Deva
Finav

Pij
Village

Feedback of farmers’ meetings

Exhibit 3.28 depicts the feedback of farmers’ meeting. Its shown that 30% farmers found
it very good, 20% good, 15% fair and 5% found it poor. Rests 30% are able to recall only
when other fellow makes them enforced to recall.
Exhibit 3.28 Feedback of farmers’ meetings in surveyed area

Very good
30% 30%
Good
Fair

5% Poor
15% 20% Enforced recall

34 College of Agribusiness
Management
Farmers interested to attend meetings
Exhibit 3.29 depicts the number of the farmers who are interested to attend the GAVL
meetings. The number of farmers interested is highest in Vasana, Sokhada and Undel i.e.
9 in each followed by Vadola i.e.8 and Bamanva i.e. 7.In Shekhdi, Noortalavadi and in
Nadiad surrounding area no farmer is interested to attend the meetings. The reason in
Shekhdi and Noortalavadi the farmer will come to the meeting only if snacks will be
distributed after the meeting while in Nadiad surrounding area farmers are very big and
they have no time to come to meetings.

Exhibit 3.29 Farmers interested to attend meetings in surveyed area

16

14

12

10
Num ber

Yes
8
No
6

Nadiad surrounding
Noortalavadi
Popatpura

Bamanva

Sokhada

Shekhdi
Vasana

Nagara
Vadola

Rampur
Undel

Vaso

Deva
Finav

Pij

Village

Farmers turning up as customers after meetings

This is reported that total farmers appeared in GAVL meetings are 175 in number as
mentioned by the company veterinarian and the dealers have reported that 18 i.e. 10% of
them are turning up as a buyer. Exhibit 3.30 shows that the highest number of turn up as
customers is highest in Vasana and Sokhada i.e. 20% in each followed by Undel i.e. 7 %

35 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Exhibit 3.30 Farmers turning up as customers after meetings

Turn up as customer in percentage

3 7 Undel

6 Vadola
20 Bamanva
5
Vasana
Sokhada
20 Nagara

Number of trials continuing

Trials are another promotional tool of GAVL. As company considers that farmers’ seeing
believes that’s why initially GAVL starts trial at the farmers’ farm and put some animals
under trial and some under control and then compare the results of both. Exhibit 3.31
depicts that currently 6 trials are continuing i.e. in Undel (2), Vadola (1), Popatpura (2)
and Bamanva (1). In rest of the villages no trial is running currently.

Exhibit 3.31Number of trials continuing

Undel
Vadola
0 Popatpura
1
Bamanva

2 Finav
Vasana
Sokhada
Nagara
Shekhdi
Noortalavadi
2 Pij
Vaso
1 Rampur
Deva
Nadiad surrounding

36 College of Agribusiness
Management
Frequency of Individual contact
Each field officer is meeting with 4 farmers in each village and covering 2-3 villages in a
day. So, frequency of individual contact is 8-12 farmers per day i.e. 24-36 farmers a
month. This meeting is takes place to get the feedback of performance of the product and
targeting the new customers. This is also done to get the feed back of farmers’ meeting
organized by GAVL as well as to follow up the trials started at the premise of the farmers.

Source of information about cattle feed

The study reveals different sources of information for cattle feed. Exhibit 3.32 depicts
counts the number of response for different sources and its shown that the major source of
information about cattle feed is Dealer (94) followed by sales representatives (67), co-
farmers (36) and Leaflet/Posters (17).

Exhibit 3.32 Source of information about cattle feed

25

20

15
Number

10

0
Pij
Undel

Deva
Rampur
Shekhdi
Nagara
Finav

Sokhada
Bamanva
Popatpura

Noortalavadi

Vaso
Vadola

Vasana

Nadiad surrounding

Leaflet/posters
Sales rep
Dealers
village
Co farmers

37 College of Agribusiness
Management
Satisfaction level of farmers for GAVL brands
Exhibit 3.33 depicts that among users i.e. 36, 2% farmers are highly satisfied, 12%
farmers are quite satisfied, 3% are indifferent, and 24% farmers are quite dissatisfied
while 49% are highly dissatisfied with the performance of GAVL brands.

Exhibit 3.33Satisfaction level of farmers for GAVL brands

Highly satisfied
2% 12%
3% Quite satisfied
49%
Indifferent

34% Quite dissatisfied

Highly dissatisfied

Reasons of satisfaction
Exhibit 3.34 depicts that among 2% highly satisfied and 12% quite satisfied users of
GAVL brands, the major reason of satisfaction is increase in profit i.e. 35% responses,
followed by increase in milk yield i.e.28%responses, fat percentage increase i.e. 25%
responses and good animal health i.e. 15% responses among satisfied farmers.

38 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Exhibit 3.34Reasons of satisfaction

15%
35% Increased profit
Increased yield
Increased fat%
25%
Animal health
25%

Reasons of dissatisfaction among farmers

Exhibit 3.35 depicts the reasons for dissatisfaction among farmers. This shows that
highest number of response i.e. 32 for the dissatisfaction goes to the farmers’ faith in
dairy that’s why they are not ready to accept any other feed. Another major reason is that
GAVL product could not increase their profit even if the production of milk or fat was
increasing by its use as prices of GAVL brand is higher than that of its competitors. Its
also reported that the use of GAVL brand could not increase milk yield or fat percentage,
which is clear from 17 responses among surveyed farmers. Some farmers have faced
problem of palatability (7) and diarrhea (6) in feeding GAVL products.

39 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Exhibit 3.35 Reasons of dissatisfaction among farmers

Nadiad surrounding
Deva
Rampur
Vaso
Pij
Noortalavadi
Shekhdi
Nagara
Sokhada
Vasana
Finav
Bamanva
Popatpura
Vadola
Undel

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Number of response

No yield Increase No profit Diarrhoea Pallatability Faith in dairy

Satisfaction level of Dealers for GAVL

Its reported that 85 % dealers among 15 surveyed dealers are highly satisfied with GAVL
and the major reason for their satisfaction is Brand association of Godrej i.e.35%
followed by Company support i.e. 25%. Increased profit and Quality product results for
20% each for their satisfaction as shown in exhibit 3.36.

40 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Exhibit 3.36Satisfaction level of Dealers for GAVL

25%
35% Company support
Increased profit
Quality product
Brand association
20%
20%

Price comparison of GAVL brands with other competitors

Table 3.3 depicts per kg prices of GAVL brands and Table 3.4 depicts per kg prices of its
competitors. Its clear that per unit prices of Milkmore and Bypro are much higher from
AMUL feed (5.5), Maize bran (7), Rice bran (6), Tur chuni (5.8), cotton seed (5), broken
rice (7), Madfhuram daan (4.2), Dhara daan (4.7), Radhakishan (4), Godhara (5),Shakti
pashu aahar (6) and Ganesh daan (3.85).Its reported that per kg prices of Maize cake (14)
and Cotton seed cake (10) are higher and Maize gluten (8) is almost similar to the prices
of Milkmore and Bypro. But farmers are finding prices of Milkmore and Bypro much
higher as quantity of Maize cake and CSC in feed is half to Milkmore and Bypro while
quantity of Maize gluten is ¼ th of Milkmore and Bypro.

Table 3.3 Per kg price of GAVL brands

GAVL brand Price/kg

MM 9
HP pellet 5.8
Bypro 8

41 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Table 3.4 Per kg prices of competitors of GAVL brands

Feed Price/kg
AMUL 5.5
Maize cake 14
CSC 10
Maize bran 7
Maize glutin 8
Rice bran 6
Tur chuni 5.8
Cotton seed 5
Broken rice 7
Madhuram 4.2
Dhara dan 4.7
Radhakishan 4
Godhara 5
Shakti pashu aahar 6
Ganesh daan 3.85

42 College of Agribusiness
Management
SWOT analysis of GAVL

Strengths
 Quality product
 Strong Support of Godrej brand
 Quality extension services
 ISO 9001:2000 company
 Awareness of GAVL brands among farmer is high
 Especially designed product for high yielding animals
Weaknesses
 Poor distribution network
 Dissatisfaction among farmers is high
 Poor follow up due to less number of field force
 Quality of after sales services is poor
 Regular user status of GAVL brands among farmers is low
 Proper emphasis to promotional strategies has not given
 Logistic management is poor so in time delivery is burdensome process
Opportunities

 Modern dairying is gearing to maximum production as opposed to traditional

dairying.
 Growth rate of milk production is 1.1% per year
 Underfed animals are the characteristics of Indian dairy farming
 Number of high yielding animals is increasing
Threats
 Strong distribution network of AMUL
 Emotional bond of farmer with AMUL is very strong
 Entry of local competitors with low price
 Market is credit based

43 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Credit recovery is uncertain and tiresome process

SWOT analysis of AMUL

Strengths
 Market leader in cattle feed in Anand
 Strong supply chain management
 Primary choice for cattle feed buyer
 Functioning as full solution provider for dairy management
 Cyclic recovery of credit as vertically integrated with farmers

Weaknesses
 Inconsistency in quality cattle feed
 Single product portfolio
 Due attention to cattle feed business is absent as its secondary activity
 Success percentage of AI is going down so bond with farmer is getting loose
 Dissatisfaction among farmers is increasing due to under measurement of fat%

Opportunities

 Modern dairying is gearing to maximum production as opposed to traditional

dairying.
 Growth rate of milk production is 1.1% per year
 Underfed animals are the characteristics of Indian dairy farming
 Number of high yielding animals is increasing

Threats
 Entry of private players with good quality feeds.
 Higher prices given by private dairies so co-operative bond getting loose.

44 College of Agribusiness
Management
Expectations of Surveyed Dealers and Distributors
 Prices of GAVL products are comparatively higher to other competitors so it
should be reduced.
 Molasses should be higher in HP pallet.
 HP pellet must have one more SKU i.e. 70 kg bag.
 Additional SKUs of MM should be of 25 kg bag.
 Availability of the material at the right time is crucial so company must take care
of it.

45 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Customer Relationship Management Model

Environmental Available Customer’s relationships

Dynamism Alternatives with other suppliers

Age of relationship
Distance Long duration
relationship
Geo C Tech S
gra ul nolog oc
phy tu y ia Suppliers
ra l share of the
l Customer’s
markets
patronage
Customer’s RSI B
Communication
i

S
Information
A

Innovations T
I
S
Competence F
A
C Bonds Trust Commitment
T
Initiatives I
O

SEI’s
RSI

Offering quality
46 College of Agribusiness
Management
RSI: Relationship specific investments
SEI: Small equity investment
Suggestions and Recommendations
Product
 New SKUs can be launch on dealers’ suggestions as smaller packs can assure more
business on cash basis as well as recover of credit will be faster.
 Positioning of each product must be unique
• MM – Quality positioning i.e. product is positioned as offering the
best quality.
• Bypro - Benefit positioning i.e. product is positions as the leader in
certain benefits.
• HP Pallet – User positioning i.e. as best for common purposes.
 Proper monitoring system should be there for better evaluation of progress of each
product.

Price
 Prices of premium brand i.e. Milkmore and Bypro are unreasonably high, as market is
not ready to except these prices so it must be restructured.

Place

 Appointing one dealer in each village should develop proper distribution network.
 Dealer must be financially strong to run business in long term.
 Number of field officers should be increased i.e. one F.O. look after 5-6 villages
for better follow-up and assured product supply.
 Number and frequency of Farmer meetings and Individual contact must be
properly designed i.e. One field officer will undertake following activities
 Frequency of Individual contact =5 farmers/day
 Number of villages covered = 1 village/ day
47 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Organizing Farmer meeting = 1 meeting /week

Promotion

 Health camp for women can be organized as women are having general health
problems and health facilities are rare in surveyed area.
 Free samples can be provided to opinion leaders of the village to increase
acceptance of the products among the farmers.
 Organizing certain fairs where give some cash prize to the highest milk yielding
and best health cattle of the farmers who use GAVL feed.
 Attractive pamphlets, posters and banners should be printed.
 Posters should be pasted at village bus stops, co-operative dairies, panchayat ghar,
schools or any other place of common gathering.
 Proper aids i.e. OHP, charts and CDs for farmer meeting should be used.
 Company banners should be placed at dealers and distributors shop.
 Quiz can be organized for farmers.

Initiatives
 Providing free home delivery in case of an order of more than Rs 1000 to strengthen
the bond with the farmer.
 Long term trial i.e. for whole lactation period and field day should be properly
organized and well advertised.
 Van campaigning with spot sales should be promoted.
 Recognition of highest selling dealer in company premises.
 Ladies club can be formed and ladies activities should be promoted.
 Schemes can be launched for the customers buying large quantities on cash.

48 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Company motive here is to convert customers into ambassadors

Suggestions and complains – – Farmers can give their suggestions to the dealers, which in
turn will pass on the information to the area manager. Also suggestions will be taken from
the local veterinarians on a regular basis. Special care will be taken to deal with complains
and necessary steps will be taken to meet them at shortest possible time.

Feedback – Feed back of each individual product will be taken from customers
individually in farmer meetings.

Word of mouth – our exclusively good service will definitely appeal the customer and it
will multiply in good word of mouth which is the most important factor for farmers to
influence their decision for cattle feed buying.

Ambassador – finally our delighted customers turn into our ambassadors who advocate or
recommend for us wherever such services will be needed in their peer group.

This will result in

Strong bond + Trust + Commitment + Small Equity Investments

Leading to
Higher Suppliers share of the customer’s market patronage.

49 College of Agribusiness
Management
References:
1. www.godrejagrovet.com
2. Annual report of NDDB, 2003-04
3. Monthly review of Gujarat economy, Centre for Monitoring Indian economy,
December 2004
4. Indian dairyman, December, 2004
5. www.amul.com
6. www.mapsofindia.com

50 College of Agribusiness
Management
 Annexure
Questionnaire -1

1. Name of Dealer-…………………
2. Place-…………………………….
3. Total sale of Mandi (animal feed)……………
4. a) Average monthly sale of Dealer ……………..
b) Sale Cash Credit
(i) Wholesale
(ii) Retail
Component Quantity Selling
price/unit

c) Expected average monthly sale …………………….

5. Total sale of Godrej Agrovet feed ……………….

Sale Cash Credit
(i) Wholesale
(ii) Retail

Godrej Brand Quantity Selling price/unit

6. a) Buying pattern of dealer

Cash Discounts Cash
Advance booking
Large quantities at once
Small quantities
b) Credit recovery period (from farmers)…………………. (Days)

51 College of Agribusiness
Management
 7. Trend of components in particular season

RM CF/ACF

i) Summer
ii) Winter
iii) Rainy

8. a) Does a farmer demands Godrej product/Brand- Y/N

b) If Yes then which product being asked by farmers-
i) Milkmore
ii) Bypro
iii) HP pellet
iv) Any other

9. If dealer pushes product, what is the satisfaction level of farmers

V.satisfied Quite satisfied Indifferent Quite dissatisfied V.dissatisf.

10. How much he pushes and how he pushes the product (strategies)……

11.Satisfaction of dealer about Godrej brands

V.satisfied Quite satisfied Indifferent Quite dissatisfied V.dissatisf.

12.Reasons for selling Godrej feed……..

13.Reasons of dissatisfaction/satisfaction

14.Factors affecting decision making of a farmer

52 College of Agribusiness
Management
 15.Suggestions if any

Questionnaire- 2

1. Name of Farmer…………………………
2. Village & P.O…………………………….
3. Address………………………………..

4. Total no. of animals Cows Buffaloes

Milking Non-milking Milking
Non-milking

Breed of animals

Average milk production

Fat%

5. Realized value of average production (per litre)

6. What are the ingredients of feed

Ingredient Quantity/day Cost/unit

7.Reasons for buying RM…..

8. Is he aware about CF/ACF Y/N

Source of information

53 College of Agribusiness
Management
9.Will he switchover to CF/ACF Y/N

Reasons for Y/N

10.Whereabouts do you buy cattle feed Fixed According to

convenience
If fixed why so…
Credit Relationship Easy to reach Quality Any
Other

11.Decision maker (caretaker) Male Female Combined %

M F
12.Factors influencing decision making
i) Price
ii) Increased milk yield
iii) Increased fat %
iv) Nutrient requirement
v) Dealer’s recommendation
vi) Availability of product
vii) Brand image of company
viii) Credit availability
ix) Impact of opinion leader
x) Past experience
xi) Increased profits
xii) Rapport of sales representative
xiii) Any other…

ix
13. Have you ever heard of Godrej feed-Y/N
a. If yes, Have you ever used Godrej feed-Y/N
b. If Y which product have you used-
c. Are you satisfied with the performance of the product-Y/N
d. If N, reasons for dissatisfaction/satisfaction

54 College of Agribusiness
Management
14. How do you find information about cattle feed
Farmer meetings……………..
Radio………….
General newspaper or magazine…………………
Direct mails…………………………………
Leaflets…………………………
From friends or colleagues
From sales reps……………………………………………….
From Agricentres
From special exhibitions or seminars
Other (PLEASE WRITE IN)______

15. Are you interested to attend the meetings ………..Y/N

If Y have you ever attended Godrej meeting………….Y/N

16. What benefits you can count out of it

55 College of Agribusiness
Management
 17. What are your expectations from these meetings

18. What are your expectations from Godrej agrovet

19. Education level of respondent

20. Age of respondent

20-30..................................................................
30-40..................................................................
40-50..................................................................
50-60..................................................................
>60.....................................................................
21. Interviewer Code Social Grade
A……………………………………………
B........................................................................
C........................................................................
D........................................................................

22. Income from dairy business

56 College of Agribusiness
Management